notably scarce. Analysis of these assemblages recovered from discrete contexts (particularly radiocarbon dated contexts) provided organizational

Transcription

1 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY The 2010 archaeological investigations of the Ashe Ferry site (38YK533) aimed to document contexts and recover assemblages from the site in order to mitigate adverse impacts to the site occasioned by the replacement of the SC Highway 5 bridge across the Catawba River. Construction of a new bridge and approach ramp after the conclusion of field investigations obliterated or buried that portion of 38YK533 north of the existing 1959 roadway that bisected the site. Phase I archaeological survey of the bridge replacement project area by Legacy, Assoc. in 2009 identified the Ashe Ferry site and documented the presence of potential buried contents, discrete features, and appreciable substantive content, qualities that led SCDOT to seek further evaluation of contextual integrity and content as an initial stage of the 2010 investigations. Testing of the site by the University of North Carolina Research Laboratories of Archaeology in the spring of 2010 clearly demonstrated integrity of site deposits and the presence of coherent material assemblages that exhibited capacity to yield information important to prehistory, consistent with significance Criterion D for eligibility of the site for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Because avoidance or other preservation options were not feasible given the scope of the bridge replacement project, mitigation of construction impacts through data recovery of information important to prehistory was undertaken immediately on the heels of site evaluation and expedited consultation, consistent with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Archaeological field investigations began on March 10, 2010 and were completed on November 19, Investigations entailed eight components: (1) establishment of a site grid; (2) field evaluation of Legacy shovel tests and exploratory backhoe trenches; (3) systematic test excavations; (4) selective mechanized stripping of plowed soil and overlying flood-deposited sand; (5) excavation of additional test units and block excavations within stripped areas; (6) additional mechanized stripping of the site; (7) mapping and excavation of archaeological features; and (8) removal, relocation, and re-interment of identified graves. Hand dug excavation units totaled 212m², a well distributed sample of approximately 3.5% of the accessible site area (exclusive of areas obscured/obliterated by the existing SC Highway 5 causeway and the site access road). These units yielded artifact samples that included approximately 8,500 ceramic sherds and 10,000 lithic artifacts, most of which are attributable to Late Woodland period site occupations. Mechanical removal of plowed soils from 2583 m² (42% of the accessible site area) revealed 81 archaeological features, 52 of which proved to be cultural in origin. These facilities included 42 features referable to Late Woodland period site occupations, seven Mississippian period deposits, one facility associated with Early Woodland period site occupation and one associated with Late Archaic period occupations. AMS dates obtained from 10 contexts indicate that the predominant Late Woodland period Ashe Ferry phase components spanned ca. A.D , followed by occupations during the early Middle Mississippian period Early Brown phase, ca. A.D Cultural features documented at 38YK533 included 17 probable roasting facilities (fire cracked rock filled basins), seven deep pits (storage facilities), 12 shallow basins, nine postholes, three graves, and a hearth. In general, the facilities form linear arrays along the terrace crest and backslope, with postholes, graves, shallow basins and hearths associated with residential activities on the crest, and roasting facilities and storage facilities situated on the backslope, where they constitute a specialized work precinct. Excavation and waterscreen or flotation processing of feature deposits recovered substantial assemblages of cultural artifacts and archaeobotanical remains; archaeofaunal remains were i

2 notably scarce. Analysis of these assemblages recovered from discrete contexts (particularly radiocarbon dated contexts) provided organizational structure for identification and interpretation of the remainder of the site collections. Analysis of plant remains established a basis for interpretation of feature function and site function. Analysis of archaeobotanical materials recovered from primary deposits in probable roasting facilities (the most common facility type) revealed predominant content of charred acorn shell fragments, a pattern indicative either of roasting acorns (with concomitant shell breakage) or use of acorn shells as fuel. Such roasting or parching of acorns is indicated as a processing technique in ethnohistoric and ethnographic literature, and these features are interpreted as processing facilities that represent a primary activity at the site. This hypothesized function is bolstered by the incidence of complete shelled acorn nutmeats recovered from deep pit features. These probable storage facilities are also posited as components of an acorn collection/processing/storage complex. Because these processing and storage facilities predominate, and because evidence for long-term residential occupation (e.g., architectural remains) is scanty, the primary Late Woodland period and early Middle Mississippian components are interpreted as representative of successive, seasonally occupied extraction camps where activities focused on collection and processing of arboreal nuts. Material assemblages recovered by the 2010 investigations at the Ashe Ferry site indicate small scale occupations during the Early, Middle, and Late Archaic periods and during the Early and Middle Woodland periods, with much more intense occupations in the terminal Late Woodland and early Middle Mississippian periods. Ceramic assemblages from features dated ca. A.D are dominated by sand tempered simple stamped wares, and constitute the Ashe Ferry phase, a construct parallel to the Santee II phase in the South Carolina Coastal Plain and the Vining phase defined in the Georgia piedmont region. Definition and temporal placement of the Ashe Ferry phase extends the geographic scope of a supra-regional terminal Late Woodland period horizon of simple stamped ceramics posited by Anderson (Anderson, et al., 1996) and others. Ceramic assemblages associated with features dated ca. A.D are characterized by grit tempered Mississippian Plain/Burnished Plain wares, which constitute one aspect of the Early Brown phase, a Savannah Culture complex parallel to the Belmont Neck and Beaverdam Creek phases, but most similar to ceramic assemblages from the Blair Mound Site in the nearby Broad River Valley. The character and dating of the Early Brown phase relative to the Ashe Ferry phase indicates relatively late transition to Mississippian ceramic patterns in the north central piedmont of South Carolina. Definition and absolute dating of the Ashe Ferry phase and Early Brown phase ceramic assemblages provides anchors for the development of cultural historical sequences specific to the central piedmont region, a particularly understudied area of South Carolina. In addition, the closely sequential dating of these Late Woodland and Mississippian period ceramic assemblages presents additional complexity to current understandings of the process of Mississippianization in the South Carolina piedmont. Finally, the proposed definition of the Ashe Ferry phase and Early Brown phase components at 38YK533 as representative of seasonally occupied extraction encampments that focused on collection, processing and storage of acorns provides an initial measure of logistical mobility in late prehistoric era settlement-subsistence systems in the central Piedmont, and illustrates the continued dietary importance of arboreal nuts long after the establishment of horticultural production. ii

3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost, we would like to thank Mr. Chad Long, NEPA Coordinator/ Archaeologist with the South Carolina Department of Transportation, both for his advocacy of archaeological data recovery at the Ashe Ferry and Ayers Town sites and for his helpful assistance throughout the field, analysis, and reporting phases of the project. We also are grateful for the advice given by Mr. Charles Cantley of the South Carolina State Historic Preservation Office and Dr. Wenonah Haire of the Catawba Tribal Historic Preservation Office. Site excavations were contracted through Mulkey Engineers and Consultants of Cary, North Carolina, and we wish to acknowledge Ms. Michelle Fishburne of that office for her assistance in administering the contract. Her counterparts at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill were Ms. Brenda A. Moore and Ms. Lisa-Jean Michienzi, both with the Research Laboratories of Archaeology, and Ms. Cathy Rogers of the UNC Office of Sponsored Research. Dr. Vincas P. Steponaitis, director of the Research Laboratories of Archaeology, provided much behind-thescenes guidance in facilitating the project. Archaeological data recovery at the Ashe Ferry site was directed by Drs. Brett H. Riggs and R. P. Stephen Davis, Jr., and undertaken in three phases. The crew for the initial phase, undertaken between March 15 and May 7, 2010 and consisting of site-wide test excavations and mechanic stripping of topsoil, included Johann Furbacher, Eric Deetz, Duane Esarey, Mary Beth Fitts, Dr. Bill Jurgelski, Sean Patton, Mark Plane, J. P. Preston, Scott Shumate, and Erin Stevens. Operation of a mini-excavator to strip topsoil from the site was ably performed by Mr. Byron K. Hill of B. K. Hill and Associates, LLC, of Rock Hill, South Carolina. During the second phase of investigation, undertaken between May 11 and June 7, 2010, students and staff of the UNC archaeological field school conducted block excavations and excavated archaeological features. The field school staff consisted of Brooke Bauer, David Cranford, Johann Furbacher, Elise Duffield, Duane Esarey, Mary Beth Fitts, Bill Jurgelski, Mark Plane, Anna Semon, Erin Stevens and Rebecca Wingo. Field school students included Timothy Barco, Rosanna Crow, Natalie DeMasi, Yosha Gunasekera, Shane Hale, Jonathan Leggett, Katherine Mullis, Laura Parks, Alyssa Parry, Sarah Settle, Michelle Stanfield, Elaine Tolbert, Mary Walker, and Abigail Winegarden. The final phase of investigation occurred between November 15 and 19, 2010 and involved the hand excavation, removal, and re-interment of three graves. This work was conducted by Johann Furbacher, Bill Jurgelski, and Eric Deetz in consultation with staff from the Catawba Tribal Historic Preservation Office. We wish to thank Ms. Beckee Garris for her thoughtful advice and assistance with this task. Prior to re-burial, a field assessment of the three graves was performed by Dr. Dale Hutchinson of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Cleaning and cataloging of the artifacts recovered from Ashe Ferry were performed by undergraduate employees and volunteers in the Research Laboratories of Archaeology. They included Jacqueline Berton, Jonathan Branch, Caroline Carter, Rosanna Crow, Elise Duffield, Shane Hale, Cassie Marcelo, Carmen Mendoza, Bouran Mozayen, Becka Rohrer, Sarah Settle, Archie Smith, Janice Tse, and Andy Valiunas. Duane Esarey and Andy Valiunas assisted Brett Riggs with the ceramic analysis. David Cranford analyzed the chipped stone projectile points from the site, and Elise Duffield, Bouran Mozayen, and Sarah Settle assisted Steve Davis with the analysis of other artifacts. Dr. Thomas R Whyte of Appalachian State University undertook the analysis of zooarchaeological remains, and Ashley Peles conducted the analysis of paleobotanical remains in consultation with Dr. C. Margaret Scarry of the University of North iii

4 Carolina. Mary Beth Fitts wrote the descriptions of archaeological features presented in the appendix. Radiocarbon samples from Ashe Ferry were analyzed by Beta Analytic, Inc., Miami, Florida. The authors are grateful for assistance, perspectives, and advice forthcoming from Jim Bates, John Cable, Bill Green, Chris Judge, Bill Jurgelski, Jon Marcoux, Chris Espenshade, Chris Moore, Chester DePratter, Dan Elliott, Mark Williams, and Sean Taylor, all of whom helped orient us to the late prehistory of the South Carolina Piedmont. John Cable, in particular, provided invaluable feedback with regard to the interpretation of ceramic artifacts recovered from the Ashe Ferry Site. Any errors or misconstructions contained herein are solely the products and responsibilities of the authors, and are included despite the best advice of experts in the region. iv

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Management Summary... i Acknowledgments... iii Chapter 1. Introduction Site Setting Geology Soils and Site Stratigraphy Climate Biotic Environment Chapter 2. Culture Historical Background Early Woodland Period Middle Woodland Period Late Woodland Period Mississippian Period Post-Contact Site History Chapter 3. Archaeological Investigations Previous Research by Legacy Research Shovel Testing Trench Excavations Initial Site Interpretation and Recommendation Investigations by the University of North Carolina Establishing the Grid Field Evaluation of Shovel Tests and Backhoe Trenches Systematic Test Excavations Phase I Stripping of Plowed Soil Phase II Stripping of Plowed Soil Additional Test Units and Block Excavations Mapping and Excavation of Archaeological Features Treatment of Archaeological Features Containing Human Remains Chapter 4. Discrete Feature Contexts and Site Structure at the Ashe Ferry Site Rock-filled Roasting Facilities Storage Pits Shallow Basins Postholes Caches Graves Site Structure Chapter 5. Chapter 5: Ceramic Artifact Assemblages Characterization of the Ashe Ferry Site Ceramic Assemblage Ceramic Vessel Sherd Sample and Analytic Methods Vessel portion Rim morphology attributes v

6 Aplastic Content Exterior Primary Surface Treatments Secondary Decorative Treatments Ceramic Typology at 38YK Ashe Ferry Simple Stamped Ashe Ferry Plain/Smoothed Ashe Ferry Cordmarked Cape Fear Fabric Impressed Uwharrie Fabric Marked Yadkin Fabric Marked Badin Fabric Impressed Deptford Check Stamped Woodstock Complicated Stamped Mississippian Burnished Plain and Mississippian Plain Early Brown Complicated Stamped Twelve Mile Check Stamped Ceramic Assemblages, Ceramic Chronology, and Site Occupation History at 38YK Chronology of the Late Woodland and Mississippian period components Ashe Ferry Phase Early Brown phase Summary and Discussion Chapter 6. Chipped-Stone, Ground-Stone, and Other Artifacts from Ashe Ferry Chipped-Stone Production Debris Cores Flakes Chipped Stone Projectile Points Kirk Serrated Projectile Point Morrow Mountain II Stemmed Projectile Points Guilford Lanceolate Projectile Points Savannah River Stemmed Projectile Points Archaic Projectile Points (Indeterminate) Yadkin Large Triangular Projectile Points Pentagonal Projectile Points Small Triangular Projectile Points Other Chipped-Stone Tools Preform Bifaces Drills Perforators Chipped Hoes End Scraper Worked Flakes Ground-Stone Tools Celts Hammerstones Possible Milling Stones vi

7 Pitted Stones Nutting Stone Other Modified Cobbles and Pebbles Stone Gorget Stone Pipes Utilized Minerals Fire-Cracked Rock Clay Artifacts Daub and Fired Clay Wooden Artifact Modern Artifacts Chapter 7. Subsistence Remains from the Ashe Ferry Site Plant Remains from the Ashe Ferry Site (38YK533), A Multi-Component Site In York County, South Carolina, by Ashley A. Peles and C. Margaret Scarry Introduction Methods and Materials Results Feature Assemblages Discussion of Plant Remains from 38YK Nuts Fruits Starchy and Oily Seeds Cultigens Miscellaneous Taxa Conclusions Archaeofaunal Remains from the Ashe Ferry Site (38yk533), York County, South Carolina, by Thomas R. Whyte Methods of Identification and Analysis Potential Biases Results Conclusions Chapter 8. Summary and Conclusions References Cited...R-1 Appendix A Survey Shovel Test Data... A-1 Appendix B. Maps, Illustrations, and Descriptions of Archaeological Features at the Ashe Ferry Site...B-1 Appendix C. Field Analysis of Human Burials, by Dale Hutchinson...C-1 Appendix D. Beta Analytic, Inc. reports on radiocarbon assays of samples from the Ashe Ferry Site... D-1 vii

8 Available online at Appendix E. Catalog of Archaeological Specimens Recovered from the Ashe Ferry Site...online Appendix F. Descriptive Inventories of Selected Artifact Classes (available as pdf documents and Excel spreadsheets)...online Appendix F1. Descriptive Inventory of Pottery from the Ashe Ferry Site Appendix F2. Descriptive Inventory of Chipped Stone Projectile Points from the Ashe Ferry Site Appendix F3. Descriptive Inventory of Chipped Stone Flakes from the Ashe Ferry Site. Appendix F4. Plant Remains Recovered from the Ashe Ferry Site Appendix F5. Descriptive Inventory of Faunal Remains from the Ashe Ferry Site viii

9 Table LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1. Summary of artifacts recovered from initial test excavations Table 3.2. Dimensions of trenches excavated during Phase I and II stripping, and numbers of test units subsequently dug in each trench Table 4.1 Discrete archaeological features designated at 38YK533 (incl. cultural and natural soil disturbances) Table 5.1. Size distribution of ceramic sherds recovered from 38YK Table 5.2. Thickness distribution of ceramic sherds recovered from 38YK Table 5.3. Summary of aplastic content and primary exterior surface treatment observed on ceramic vessel sherds from 38YK Table 5.4. Secondary decorative treatments observed on 38YK533 sherds Table 5.5. AMS dates associated with 38YK533 feature contexts Table 5.6. Ceramic sherds associated with contexts dated ca. A.D (38YK533, Features 11, 46, 50, 52, 77) Table 5.7. Ceramic sherds from dated mid-12th century contexts (Features 28 and 48) Table 5.8. Ceramic sherds recovered from post-a.d dated contexts used to define Early Brown phase assemblages Table 5.9. Ceramic sherds attributed to Early Brown phase occupations Table Early Brown phase rim treatments, 38YK Table 6.1. Summary of Stone Artifacts Recovered from the Ashe Ferry Site Table 6.2. Distribution of chipped-stone flakes by excavation context, raw material, and size class Table 6.3. Distribution of chipped-stone flakes by excavation context, raw material, size, and presence/absence of cortex Table 6.4. Measurement statistics for small triangular projectile points from the Ashe Ferry Site Table 6.5. Summary of basal and lateral edge shape for small triangular projectile points from Late Woodland, Mississippian, and other contexts at the Ashe Ferry Site Table 6.6. Distribution of fire-cracked rock by feature and size category Table 6.7. Fire-cracked rock counts and weights by size category for all cultural features Table 7.1. Flotation samples examined for botanical remains from the Ashe Ferry site Table 7.2. Plant taxa represented in analyzed samples from 38YK Table 7.3. Nut remains by feature from the Ashe Ferry site Table 7.4. Number of identified specimens (NISP) of animal remains from 38YK ix Page

10 Figure LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1. LiDAR-based relief map of the Catawba River valley showing the topographic setting of the Ashe Ferry (38YK533) and Ayers Town (38YK534) sites opposite the mouth of Twelvemile Creek Figure 1.2. Aerial photograph taken March 30, 2004 of the project area Figure 1.3. Aerial photograph taken March 26, 2012 of the project area Figure 1.4. Sections of the Catawba, S.C. and Van Wyck, S.C. 7.5-minute series USGS topographic maps showing the towns, roads, and railroads located in the vicinity of the Ashe Ferry (38YK533) and Ayers Town (38YK534) sites in Figure 2.1. Map indicating locations of key archaeological sites discussed in text Figure 2.2. Detail of the 1775 An Accurate Map of North and South Carolina Figure plats for land deeded to Benjamin S. Massey on both sides of the Catawba River above Twelvemile Creek Figure 2.4 View to west of Ashe Ferry in operation in Figure 2.5. Aerial view [1959] of the construction of the SC Highway 9 bridge and the approach across 38YK Figure 3.1. Legacy Research Associates project map, showing project boundaries and the locations of sites 38YK533, 38YK534, and 38La Figure 3.2. Legacy Research Associates map of archaeological testing at the Ashe Ferry site (38YK533) (from Legacy 2009:43) Figure 3.3. View of the Ashe Ferry site looking southeast along the access road. The Catawba River is to the left and the SC Highway 5 bridge approach is to the right Figure 3.4. Map of the Ashe Ferry site showing the placement of Legacy excavations, as relocated in the field, and the site s estimated limits based on those excavations Figure 3.5. Map of potsherd density at the Ashe Ferry site based on artifact samples recovered from shovel test pits by Legacy archaeologists Figure 3.6. Re-excavation of Legacy Trench 9, showing the cleaned east profile and descriptions of strata Figure 3.7. Map of the Ashe Ferry site showing the site boundary, as revised following an analysis of Legacy shovel testing data, and the placement of initial unit excavations Figure 3.8. Excavating and dry-screening fill from Square 870R850 during systematic testing Figure 3.9. Soil profile for Square 770R910, located south of the highway Figure Soil profile for Square 750R950 at the southeast edge of the site Figure Soil profile for Square 830R890, located north of the highway Figure Soil profile for Square 850R870, located north of the highway Page x

11 Figure View of the R excavation block following removal of plowed soil, showing Feature 47 on the soil pedestal at top left and the top of Feature 49 near the center of the excavation Figure Map of potsherd density at Ashe Ferry based on artifact samples recovered from systematic test excavations. The shading represents the revised site area Figure Removing flood sands and modern plowed soil with a trackhoe during phase I stripping at the Ashe Ferry site Figure Flatshoveling the base of an excavated trench during phase I stripping to identify archaeological features and retrieve artifacts Figure Map of the Ashe Ferry site showing the 23 trenches opened during Phase I stripping of plowed soil and the 72 test units excavated within those trenches Figure Excavating and mapping test units in Trench Figure Trench test units excavated from the trench base to the top of subsoil Figure Map of the Ashe Ferry site showing the additional 16 trenches opened during II Phase stripping of plowed soil Figure Map of the Ashe Ferry site showing all stripped trenches, test units, and block excavations Figure Excavating units at the north edge of the Trench 2 block Figure Cluster of large fabric marked potsherds found in Square 873R856 within Trench 2 excavation block Figure Trench 15 after phase I stripping and excavation of test units Figure Trench 15 excavation block with old plowzone removed Figure Excavating the block within Trenches 17 and Figure East and south soil profiles for the L-shaped trench comprising the Trenches 17 and 23 excavation block Figure The Trench 18 excavation block, showing in situ fire-cracked rocks associated with Feature Figure Map of the Ashe Ferry site showing the total extent of excavations and all identified archaeological features of cultural origin Figure Mapping and recording the top elevations of Feature 48 prior to excavation Figure Trowelling Feature 17 for photography and profile mapping after removing the fill zones in the north half of the feature Figure Excavating fill from around fire-broken hearth stones in Feature Figure Waterscreening feature fill at the Ashe Ferry site Figure 4.1. Plan of 38YK533 indicating locations of discrete archaeological features Figure 4.2. Detail of the northern half of the 38YK533 site plan indicating locations of discrete archaeological features Figure 4.3. Detail of the southern half of the 38YK533 site plan indicating locations of discrete archaeological features Figure 4:4. Illustrations of Feature 74, a rock-filled roasting facility xi

12 Figure 4.5. Illustrations of Feature 11, a probable Ashe Ferry phase storage/processing pit Figure 4.6. Illustrations of Feature 20, a probable Ashe Ferry phase storage/processing pit Figure 4.7 Feature 16, a shallow basin that probably represents the basal remnant of a plow truncated roasting facility Figure 4.8. Feature 50, a shallow basin with subpits including in situ vessel fragments Figure 4.9. Feature 61 plan view and profile drawings and excavation photographs: Figure Feature 56, a probable posthole Figure Feature 75, a probable posthole and in situ stone-tool cache Figure Feature 80, a probable Late Archaic period cache Figure Feature 43 plan view and profile drawings, and excavation photographs Figure Feature 45 plan view and profile drawings, and excavation photographs Figure Feature 62 plan view and profile drawings, and excavation photographs Figure Ceramic sherd density at 38YK Figure Map of 38YK533 indicating hypothesized spatial precincts Figure 5.1. Schematic of possible vessel forms indicating location/landmarks for vessel portions Figure 5.2. Simple and thickened castellate rim forms represented at 38YK Figure 5.3. Schematic illustrating vessel rim morphologies identified in the 38YK533 ceramic sample Figure 5.4. Schematic illustrating vessel lip morphologies identified in the 38YK533 ceramic sample Figure 5.5. Sherd edge views illustrating aplastic/temper states observed in 38YK533 ceramic sherds Figure 5.6. Ashe Ferry Simple Stamped rim sherds from 38YK Figure 5.7. Plain wares from the Ashe Ferry site Figure 5.8. Fabric impressed wares from the Ashe Ferry site Figure 5.9. Cord marked sherds from the Ashe Ferry site Figure Complicated stamped wares from the Ashe Ferry site Figure Check stamped wares from the Ashe Ferry site Figure 5.12 Cobmarked sherd recovered from plowzone at 38YK Figure Cord wrapped dowel stamped sherd recovered from plowzone at 38YK Figure Secondary decorative treatments Figure 5.15 Ashe Ferry Simple Stamped sherds recovered from Feature xii

13 Figure 5.16 Ashe Ferry Simple Stamped rim profiles Figure Edge view of Cape Fear Fabric Impressed sherd illustrating aplastic content Figure Reconstructed Cape Fear Fabric Impressed vessel from 38YK Figure Uwharrie Fabric Marked sherd (obverse and reverse views) from 38YK Figure Edge view of Uwharrie Fabric Marked sherd illustrating aplastic content Figure Yadkin Fabric Impressed rim (obverse and reverse views) from 38YK Figure Badin Fabric Impressed sherds with mend hole Figure Edge view of Badin Fabric Impressed sherd illustrating aplastic content Figure Deptford Check Stamped vessel section, Feature 58, 38YK Figure Woodstock Complicated Stamped sherds, Trench 10, 38YK Figure Woodstock Complicated Stamped sherds, Feature 1, 38YK Figure Woodstock Complicated Stamped jar section, Feature 1, 38YK Figure Mississippian Plan/Burnished Plain rims from 38YK533 plowzone deposits Figure Early Brown Complicated Stamped sherds from 38YK533 plowzone contexts Figure Elaborated rims attributed to Early Brown Complicated Stamped vessels from 38YK533 plowzone Figure Early Brown phase (early Middle Misssissippian period) vessel rim profiles Figure Twelve Mile Check Stamped sherds from 38YK Figure Rim profile of Twelve Mile Check Stamped vessel section Figure Graph illustrating calibrations of AMS dates from 38YK533 contexts Figure Ashe Ferry Simple Stamped sherds recovered from Feature Figure Sherds recovered from Feature Figure Ashe Ferry Simple Stamped sherds recovered from Feature Figure Ashe Ferry Simple Stamped sherds recovered from Feature Figure Ashe Ferry Simple Stamped sherds recovered from Feature Figure Ceramic sherds recovered from Feature Figure Ceramic sherds recovered from Feature Figure 6.1. Lithic raw material types represented at the Ashe Ferry site Figure 6.2. Percent distribution of flakes by raw material and flake size Figure 6.3. Miscellaneous Archaic, Woodland, and Mississippian projectile points recovered from the Ashe Ferry site Figure 6.4. Small triangular projectile points from features attributed to the Late Woodland Ashe Ferry phase xiii

14 Figure 6.5. Small triangular projectile points from features attributed to the Mississippian period Figure 6.6. Small triangular projectile points from general excavation contexts at the Ashe Ferry site Figure 6.7. Chipped-stone preform, triangular bifaces, drills, and perforators from the Ashe Ferry site Figure 6.8. Chipped hoes from the Ashe Ferry site Figure 6.9. Celts, celt fragments, and celt blank from the Ashe Ferry site Figure Hammerstones, pitted cobble, and nutting stone from the Ashe Ferry site Figure Stone pipe bowl from Feature 20 (top row), stone platform pipe from Feature 45 (bottom left and center), and stone gorget fragment from Trench 30 (bottom right) Figure Examples of alate-stemmed and monitor-style platform pipes from the McLean Mound Figure Sample of fire-broken quartz and quartzite cobbles recovered from Feature 47, a Late Woodland cooking/processing facility Figure Clay pipe fragments and pottery disk from the Ashe Ferry site Figure Fragments of architectural daub and mud dauber s nest from Feature 41 (top), and section of a charred wooden shaft from Feature 28 (bottom) Figure 7.1. Figure 7.1. Plan of 38YK533 excavations indicating contexts sampled for archaeobotanical analysis Figure 7.2. Chart illustrating differential distribution of plant food residues (by count) in roasting facilities vs. deep pits Figure 7.3. Chart illustrating differential distribution of plant food residues (percentage of identified specimens) in roasting facilities vs. deep pits xiv

15

16